In a move that could fundamentally alter the nation's approach to transportation infrastructure, a newly formed council under the Trump administration will begin deliberating on the aesthetics of federally-funded projects Monday. The Beautifying Transportation Infrastructure Council, comprising eight members led by architecture critic Justin Shubow, aims to advise Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy on the visual appeal of planned bridges, roads, highways, airports, and transit hubs.
Shubow, also president of the National Civic Art Society, has been vocal about his disdain for modern architecture in America. He believes that much of the country's landscape is "soulless" and lacking in beauty, and that current infrastructure projects often fall short in terms of design excellence. In contrast to Shubow's views, a more nuanced approach is being advocated by transportation expert Joseph Schwieterman, who notes that engineering requirements should remain the primary drivers of road design.
However, Shubow sees potential for innovative solutions that could elevate the nation's infrastructure beyond mere functionality. He suggests incorporating elements like wildflowers along highways and prioritizing biophilia in design. For instance, the expansion of O'Hare Airport's Terminal D has caught his attention, with its proposed incorporation of greenery. Additionally, Union Station is being praised for its potential renovation to maintain its status as "one of the great train stations" in the country.
Critics argue that this new council may be an attempt by the Trump administration to impose a specific design aesthetic on federal infrastructure projects, one that prioritizes classical architectural styles over more innovative and context-specific approaches. This could limit the creativity and potential for good design, ultimately hindering efforts to make America's transportation infrastructure truly exceptional.
As the council begins its deliberations, it remains unclear whether individual project reviews or guidelines will be developed for review by USDOT. Nevertheless, with the nation's infrastructure budget estimated at $100 billion, the stakes are high, and any approach taken by this council could have significant implications for America's roads, bridges, and public spaces.
Shubow, also president of the National Civic Art Society, has been vocal about his disdain for modern architecture in America. He believes that much of the country's landscape is "soulless" and lacking in beauty, and that current infrastructure projects often fall short in terms of design excellence. In contrast to Shubow's views, a more nuanced approach is being advocated by transportation expert Joseph Schwieterman, who notes that engineering requirements should remain the primary drivers of road design.
However, Shubow sees potential for innovative solutions that could elevate the nation's infrastructure beyond mere functionality. He suggests incorporating elements like wildflowers along highways and prioritizing biophilia in design. For instance, the expansion of O'Hare Airport's Terminal D has caught his attention, with its proposed incorporation of greenery. Additionally, Union Station is being praised for its potential renovation to maintain its status as "one of the great train stations" in the country.
Critics argue that this new council may be an attempt by the Trump administration to impose a specific design aesthetic on federal infrastructure projects, one that prioritizes classical architectural styles over more innovative and context-specific approaches. This could limit the creativity and potential for good design, ultimately hindering efforts to make America's transportation infrastructure truly exceptional.
As the council begins its deliberations, it remains unclear whether individual project reviews or guidelines will be developed for review by USDOT. Nevertheless, with the nation's infrastructure budget estimated at $100 billion, the stakes are high, and any approach taken by this council could have significant implications for America's roads, bridges, and public spaces.
... I mean, who doesn't love pretty buildings? But seriously, it's like they're trying to make our highways look like grandma's garden. Wildflowers on the side of the road? It sounds cute but what about safety? And don't even get me started on biophilia - isn't that just a fancy word for "nature"? I think some balance is needed here 
... maybe we can have some green spaces, but not like they're gonna ruin the whole experience. What if it's a case of less is more? Less embellishment, more function?
Interesting to think that the look of a highway or airport could be considered when deciding how to spend 100 billion dollars... What if it's not just about looks but also about functionality and environment too? 
... I get the biophilia thing, but we gotta balance that with the engineering requirements, you know? The Union Station renovation is cool and all, but let's not forget about accessibility and sustainability too 
. This council's gotta be careful not to just impose some fancy design on America's infrastructure without thinking it through...
. And what's the point of putting wildflowers along highways? Is that really gonna improve traffic flow or something? 
. What if they end up messing with perfectly good projects that are actually necessary? 
$100 billion is a lot of cash, and we need to make sure it's spent wisely... not just on looks 
.
. I mean, can you imagine driving down a highway with wildflowers blooming alongside it? It'd be so sick! 
But for real though, I do think we need to balance aesthetics with functionality, like Joseph Schwieterman said. Can't have roads that are all fancy but still super slow or something 
.
.
. I mean, don't get me wrong, aesthetics are important, but is this really where our $100 billion budget should be going? It feels like they're trying to impose some kinda retro, classical vibe on the country 
. And what about all the modern designs that are actually making a difference? Like, have you seen the new Google HQ in LA? That's some top-notch architecture right there 
. This council just sounds like a bunch of wealthy architects telling everyone else what's "beautiful" and what's not 
. I'm watching this closely, though... if they start dictating design standards for every highway and bridge, that's when we know something fishy is going on 
.
I mean, who wouldn't want to drive on a highway with wildflowers blooming alongside it? 